in Re: Readyone Industries, Inc.
394 S.W.3d 697
Tex. App.2012Background
- ReadyOne seeks mandamus to overturn trial court order allowing discovery on whether Franken Amendment applies to arbitrability of Torres's on-the-job injury negligence claims.
- Torres sued ReadyOne for negligence alleging on-the-job injuries; ReadyOne moved to compel arbitration under an arbitration agreement.
- Torres argued Franken Amendment voids enforcement of arbitration for certain torts related to sexual assault/harassment, including negligent hiring/supervision/retention.
- Trial court allowed targeted discovery: whether ReadyOne had federal contracts >$1M and whether ReadyOne manufactures off-the-shelf items.
- ReadyOne petitioned for mandamus claiming Franken Amendment is inapplicable to non-subscriber personal injury claims and that discovery was irrelevant and harassing.
- Texas Court of Appeals granted mandamus, holding Franken Amendment does not apply to these tort claims and that the discovery order was an abuse of discretion with no adequate remedy by appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Franken Amendment apply to non-subscriber personal injury claims | ReadyOne: amendment does not cover these torts | Torres: amendment applies to such torts | Franken Amendment not applicable to these claims |
| Was the discovery order an abuse of discretion and not curable by appeal | ReadyOne: discovery seeks irrelevant, burdensome information | Torres: discovery permissible to determine applicability | Trial court abused discretion; mandamus granted to vacate discovery order |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124 (Tex. 2004) (mandamus standard and adequacy of remedy by appeal guidance)
- Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833 (Tex. 1992) (adequate remedy by appeal when discovery is harassing or burdensome)
- In re Cerberus Capital Mgmt., L.P., 164 S.W.3d 379 (Tex. 2005) (discretion in discovery and standard of abuse of discretion)
- In re CSX Corp., 124 S.W.3d 149 (Tex. 2003) (limits on discovery; relevance requirements)
- In re Am. Optical Corp., 988 S.W.2d 711 (Tex. 1998) (proper tailoring of discovery; fishing expeditions prohibited)
- Entergy Gulf States, Inc. v. Summers, 282 S.W.3d 433 (Tex. 2009) (statutory construction approach; de novo review)
- Lexington Ins. Co. v. Strayhorn, 209 S.W.3d 83 (Tex. 2006) (statutory interpretation guidance)
- City of San Antonio v. Boerne, 111 S.W.3d 22 (Tex. 2003) (ejusdem generis and noscitur a sociis doctrines)